LETTERS: QUESTIONABLE LOGIC

To the editor:

Jay Eastlick falsely imagines (in his Aug. 26. column) that if he sets up a straw man, he won't need to bother with facts and evidence. That straw man is almost always some form of liberalism or secular humanism or, in the case of his most recent column, relativism and situation ethics.

As usual, Eastlick takes some current tragic event, in this case the Deletha Word incident on a Detroit bridge, and without a shred of evidence -- or logic -- he draws the conclusion that the cause of this tragic event is relativity and situation ethics and the decline of the religious absolutes found in the Judeo-Christian religion.

Were the people on the bridge believers in relativity and situation ethics? Or were the people on the bridge primarily believers in the Judeo-Christian religion? Of course, Eastlick can't answer this question, because he has no idea what beliefs were held by the people on the bridge. And because he can't answer that question, his entire argument falls apart, and the conclusion he draws is utter nonsense.

Before Eastlick writes another dishonest diatribe, he needs to learn that a valid argument needs evidence, not unfounded opinion, and that the positive moral values found int he Judeo-Christian bibles aren't the exclusive province of the Judeo-Christian religion. In fact, many ancient philosophers, such as Confucius, Epicurus, Lucretius, Epitetus, Buddha and Lao-tze, established very positive systems of moral values which teach responsibility, tolerance, compassion and good conduct. In other words, people can be moral and can act morally without a theology to support their moral beliefs.

JOHN C. BIERK

Cape Girardeau